/m/hof

Reader Comments and Retorts

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

the 500-homer, 3,000-hit, 300-win milestones that used to mean automatic entry

Is Biggio the first (non-steroid-test-failing, non-gambling-banned) 3000-hit player to have to wait at least one ballot? I know there have been some others at those milestones who've waited a few years (Mathews, Killebrew, Niekro, Sutton). Brett is right that they all get elected eventually, barring external factors, but even those huge milestones have not been first-ballot guarantees.

Is Biggio the first (non-steroid-test-failing, non-gambling-banned) 3000-hit player to have to wait at least one ballot?

Paul Waner. Though the rules were different then, he didn't go in until 8 years after his last game and had to climb up the BBBWA leaderboard. I don't think any of the others who retired in the Hall of Fame era had to wait until Biggio.

Brett is right that they all get elected eventually, barring external factors, but even those huge milestones have not been first-ballot guarantees.

Yes. I think automatic milestones has served as really misleading shorthand. Those numbers result in enshrinement because it has historically required Hall of Fame performance to hit them, but I don't think many of the voters have ever felt required to vote for someone simply because they hit one of those markers, which is often the perception.

Is Biggio the first (non-steroid-test-failing, non-gambling-banned) 3000-hit player to have to wait at least one ballot?

A couple of the early backlog guys (e.g. Collins, Lajoie, etc...) had to wait a couple of years and Waner did as well but the voting procedures were very different then. His first "modern" election date saw him get 71% and he went in on what would be year two in today's standards.

Yes. I think automatic milestones has served as really misleading shorthand. Those numbers result in enshrinement because it has historically required Hall of Fame performance to hit them, but I don't think many of the voters have ever felt required to vote for someone simply because they hit one of those markers, which is often the perception.

I suspect they do automatically vote for milestones, but I don't know how we can tell whether you're correct or whether we've just been lucky enough to avoid the Kingman-esque test case so far.

The best actual example I can think of is Paul Molitor. It's not a great example because he didn't just squeak over the line -- he had 3,319 hits -- so it'd be tough to get him down to 2,750 or something without compromising his "true" credentials. Still, I don't think a DH with 234 homers and 2,750 hits would make the Hall of Fame through the BBWAA at all¹, yet with 3,319, he got 85% of the vote on his first ballot. Like I said, that's a guess on my part, hypothetical until someone hits a milestone without having much of a case otherwise, which is difficult to do, but not impossible.

¹ They'd probably be wrong not to vote for him anyway -- he wasn't a DH his whole career, he had speed, hit doubles, etc. -- but I don't think they would.

Can't edit previous post anymore, but considering it further, I wonder if, if we "took away" Molitor's hits by turning them into walks, we would essentially get Edgar Martinez, a DH who hit .312 with 309 HR, and whom I nonetheless don't think will be elected by the BBWAA.

Can't edit previous post anymore, but considering it further, I wonder if, if we "took away" Molitor's hits by turning them into walks, we would essentially get Edgar Martinez, a DH who hit .312 with 309 HR, and whom I nonetheless don't think will be elected by the BBWAA.

Molitor had 4000 more plate appearances than Edgar, and had substantially worse rate stats. They're not really very similar players except for spending a bunch of time at DH and not hitting homeruns.

I think the closest I can get is Rickey Henderson and Jack Morris in 1976 which isn't too shabby when you consider that Rickey was drafted at the bottom of the 4th round and Morris was drafted at the top of the 5th.

I suspect they do automatically vote for milestones, but I don't know how we can tell whether you're correct or whether we've just been lucky enough to avoid the Kingman-esque test case so far.

The best actual example I can think of is Paul Molitor. It's not a great example because he didn't just squeak over the line -- he had 3,319 hits -- so it'd be tough to get him down to 2,750 or something without compromising his "true" credentials. Still, I don't think a DH with 234 homers and 2,750 hits would make the Hall of Fame through the BBWAA at all¹, yet with 3,319, he got 85% of the vote on his first ballot. Like I said, that's a guess on my part, hypothetical until someone hits a milestone without having much of a case otherwise, which is difficult to do, but not impossible.

¹ They'd probably be wrong not to vote for him anyway -- he wasn't a DH his whole career, he had speed, hit doubles, etc. -- but I don't think they would.

That's a slightly different position. I firmly believe that reaching a milestone does goose the process for the deserving, and Molitor is most definitely deserving.

What I don't see evidence of is that it can turn otherwise unworthy players, such as Dunn if he reaches 500 homers, or Edgar Renteria, had he hung around for 3,000 hits, into Cooperstownian timber. And if it can't do that, then it really isn't an automatic number. The fact that it took Mathews, Killebrew and Sutton, all qualified Hall of Famers, several ballots to get in suggests that a substantial number of writers didn't just check off their names as soon as they hit 500 or 300.

The only possible exception would be Brock, but being both the all-time single-season and career stolen base record holders when he retired, on top of his postseason performance and the 3K, made him a fairly easy choice for the BBWAA.

Yeah, they probably aren't automatic. 500 HR certainly no longer will be (but 550 or 600 might). But they give a massive boost. True, Kingman with 500 HR probably doesn't make it or come particularly close but Kingman with 500 HR probably stays on the ballot with a respectable vote total for 15 years rather than falling off after one ballot. Don Larsen lasted 15 years on the ballot, peaking at 12%, all just for throwing a perfect game in the WS. I suspect that if you gave Murphy another 50-100 HR, he'd be in. And the best comparison is probably not Molitor-Edgar but Brock-Raines. Brock had more than the 3,000 hits going for him of course and most of the difference is due to voters of that era not having a clue about the value of walks and over-rating the value of stolen bases. But a good chunk of that gap is due to 3,000 hits.

The 300-win pitchers are also instructive. People think of 300 wins as an automatic lock now (and it probably does mean more given the number if innings that guys pitch today, but Early Wynn took 4 years to get in, Gaylord Perry took 3, Niekro and Sutton each took 5. I don't think there should be a distinction between first-ballot guys and non-first ballot guys, but historically it has often been very difficult to make it in on the first ballot.

@ Paste, isn't it safe to say in 2013 that 600 Home Runs is the new 500 for enshrinement purposes? By the time Dunn gets his five years in, WAR will have a MUCH, much stronger impact on the process, in my view. And I doubt he reaches 600 HRs. He'd have to hit 40 dingers into his year 38. Possible, I suppose, just not a bet I'd make.

The ESPN Career Assessment calculator gives him a 97% chance of reaching 500. That seems high, but I would certainly bet even money on him making it, and possibly give odds.

That seems absurdly high. I doubt the calculator takes anything into account other than total homers, yearly home run output, and age. Would anyone be remotely surprised if Dunn completely sucks this year and only hits a dozen or so homers, a la 2011? And then next year, in the final year of his contract, gets cut and doesn't find another big league job? I don't know what kind of odds I would give that particular scenario, but I'd give at least 50/50 odds on him washing out before 500.

Wynn might have been hurt by reaching 300. If he'd retired after 1960, with 284 wins, he might have been better-perceived; his hanging on to get his 300th eroded his image. (Biggio may have suffered something of that effect, too.)

Why should Hall of Famers be motivated to go to Cooperstown for Induction Weekend? First off, they're treated to a weekend at the Otesaga Hotel with an opportunity to socialize with their friends in baseball. Second, they can honor the legacies of White, Ruppert, and O'Day, who are now full-fledged members of the Hall of Fame. Third, they'll give baseball fans a chance to see them, get their autographs, and possibly ask them a question at one of the Hall of Fame programs.

The weekend is a celebration of baseball and its history. It's good for the game, good for the Hall of Famers, and good for the fans.

There will be thousands and thousands fewer fans this July, and their questions are going to include "Why didn't anybody get elected?" and "What do you think about steroids, Vol. 30,000?" White's last game was when George Brett was negative-63 years old. How's room service at the Otesaga?

Everybody loves the induction ceremony, but this year the writers really screwed the pooch. I wish Schmidt would show up. His comments have always been among the most interesting and honest on the Subject of All Subjects. And the writers need and deserve every possible kick in the ass they can get as they embark on their quest to diminish an institution with a generation of spite voting.

I suspect a lot won't want to go due to the fact they'll be hit with questions about steroids from the writers. 'would you be here if Bonds was voted in, how do you feel about steroids, would you have done them, blah blah blah'

Gotta figure that, outside of publicity addicts like Gossage, most would have zero interest in going through that. They'd much rather be talking about how great it is to see a guy voted in who they played against/respected/knew. But instead they get to celebrate a lot of dead people. Morbid really.

I suspect a lot won't want to go due to the fact they'll be hit with questions about steroids from the writers. 'would you be here if Bonds was voted in, how do you feel about steroids, would you have done them, blah blah blah

Agree. I think that since there is nobody alive being inducted that too many of the questions are going to be of the nature "would you rather be here inducting McGwire, or here not inducting anyone?" type of vein. Forcing the guys who have carefully stayed out of the discussion into committing to a side.

Five of the six oldest guys still alive didn't go last year, and they are all 85+...it's hard to imagine they wouldn't all have health and age issues in coming to Cooperstown.

Actually, everybody on this list from Yaz on down is at least 72 years old - it's hard for me to get too judgmental about a 70- or 80-something year old guy not flying to the middle of New York state on what always seems to be an oppressively hot and arid weekend in the dog days of summer to sit on a stage and listen to a couple of people give speeches for an hour.

The six people on this list that stand out are the youngest ones - Ripken, Yount, Gossage, Ryan, Carew, and Sutton. Yount and Carew seem like really private guys. Ryan was probably busy with his job with the Rangers. But Ripken? Really? And Gossage runs his mouth off every couple of days, and he doesn't go to the ceremony? Sutton surprised me - he has been very visible on TV since his retirement, and this strikes me as the kind of thing he would enjoy doing...but maybe he, too, was working that weekend.

Looking at this list, I guess a higher percentage of living HOFers showed up last year than I would've predicted. How many of these guys will bother coming this year?

Over the years, Don Sutton has missed a lot of Braves broadcasts on Hall of Fame induction weekend because he was in attendance for the ceremony. I don't know why he didn't go to the ceremony that particular year, but if I were to guess, I'd say he probably had some conflict. Who knows, maybe a family issue or something. Certainly there can be all sorts of good reasons to not go.

Unless it's a friend, teammate or at least somebody played against, is there any particular reason an HoFer would show up for a living induction instead of a dead one? Was Bob Feller excited to see Sutter go in?

Or anybody for that matter. I assume (perhaps incorrectly) that the main difference between a living induction weekend and a non-living induction weekend is that there are a lot more fans of the living dude willing to come to Cooperstown.

Which I know is a "duh" point but it's not "living/dead" it's "popular/unknown". I don't imagine at this point that the VC electing, say, Darrell Evans is really going to make much of a difference.

Kind of hard to opine about the new class when they all played before you and were dead before you were even born.

For the older guys it probably makes no difference. A free trip, a chance to make some money, and meet old friends. For someone like Brett or Sandberg those things probably hold little value. I also can see the living HoF'ers valuing the act of welcoming the new members to the Hall. Without any new alive members that isn't needed this time around.

I cannot speak for yount but I suspect he hasn't gone to a ceremony since his own induction for one or both of the following reasons:

--yount doesn't go much for such things. he's a low key guy and these types of ceremonies just aren't of much interest. he went to his own more out of courtesy I suspect than wanting the attention. I do know he was glad he was part of a group and everyone seemed focused on brett and ryan

--yount may not have the cash to make the trip. his brother lost a ton of his money some time ago and yount has had to keep working because he was all but broke after that mess

I remember a circa-1980 Saturday Night Live bumper which was a still photograph. It showed one man on stage in the distance with a guitar and one man sitting on a chair watching him. The Don Pardo voiceover announced, "Johnny Cash plays Spandau Prison. Sunday Night on NBC."

I think of that image and imagine that is what this summer's HOF ceremony will be like.